出口中國的英國教育是否會變味？
通常，來自我母校董事會負(fù)責(zé)人的、帶來有關(guān)雄心勃勃新發(fā)展的“激動人心消息”的郵件，會讓我感到恐慌，并且必然附有募捐的請求。這里要建一座新劇院，或者那里要把我的名字刻在石板上讓我百世流芳——一種讓人無法拒絕的提議。
This one, however, was different. Westminster School in London had signed an agreement to set up six new establishments in China in the next decade, the latest example of a British private school embracing the biggest education market in the world.
然而，這一次情況完全不同。倫敦威斯敏斯特學(xué)校(Westminster School)簽署了一項(xiàng)協(xié)議，將在未來十年在中國建立6家新機(jī)構(gòu)。這是英國私立學(xué)校擁抱全世界最大的教育市場的最新例子。
Under the terms of an ambitious deal, Westminster will export its successful teaching methods to Chengdu and other cities. In return the school will boost its bursary funds, making more money available to help families on lower incomes access an education at one of the UK’s leading — and pricier — academic independent schools, whose former pupils include politicians, writers, rock stars and the odd trapeze artist. The venture sits within an initiative to promote collaboration between future leaders of both countries.
根據(jù)一項(xiàng)雄心勃勃的協(xié)議，威斯敏斯特學(xué)校將把它成功的教育方法出口至成都和其他城市。作為回報，該學(xué)校將增加助學(xué)基金，提供更多資金來幫助較低收入家庭的孩子在這所英國領(lǐng)先(并且較為昂貴的)學(xué)術(shù)獨(dú)立學(xué)校接受教育，這里曾經(jīng)培養(yǎng)出政客、作家、搖滾明星和高空雜技演員。合資建校的計(jì)劃是基于促進(jìn)兩國未來領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人之間合作的倡議。
This all seems to tick many boxes. These range from a need for a “global Britain” to seize new opportunities, to Westminster acquiring the means to fulfil its obligations as a charity to make its schooling as widely available as possible.
這一切似乎是一舉多得，包括滿足“全球化的英國”掌握新機(jī)遇的需求，以及讓威斯敏斯特學(xué)校獲得履行其作為慈善機(jī)構(gòu)盡可能廣泛施教的職責(zé)的手段。
The move is also in keeping with a broader trend. For years now British schools have been operating offshoots in China (and elsewhere), selling various brands of top-drawer education directly in to fast-growing markets. Some have done very well, others have struggled, while one or two have faced concerns from parents that global expansion has become a distraction from the core mission back home. If anything, Westminster is a bit late to the China party.
此舉也符合整體趨勢。多年來，英國的學(xué)校不斷在中國(及其他地區(qū))運(yùn)營分支機(jī)構(gòu)，直接向快速增長的市場銷售各種頂級教育品牌。有些學(xué)校做的非常出色，有些學(xué)?？嗫鄴暝?，同時還有一兩家學(xué)校要應(yīng)對來自家長的擔(dān)憂——全球化擴(kuò)張分散了學(xué)校完成本國核心任務(wù)的精力。對于威斯敏斯特學(xué)校來說，它加入中國盛宴的時間可能有點(diǎn)晚了。
On one level I am impressed by this outburst of commercial savvy. The entrepreneurial spirit underpinning the China gambit seems a world away from the shabby, bohemian atmosphere that reigned at the school during my years of badly dyed hair, winkle-picker shoes and clandestine smokes in the shadows of Big Ben, amid fraught attempts actually to talk to girls. The facilities were varied — breakfast in a gem of a medieval refectory followed by language lessons in a couple of leaking Portakabins — and the teaching was excellent, if at times unorthodox.
在某種程度上，這種突然迸發(fā)出來的商業(yè)思維令我印象深刻。支撐學(xué)校的中國策略的創(chuàng)業(yè)精神，與我上學(xué)時學(xué)校破破爛爛卻放浪不羈的氣氛相比恍如隔世，那時的我，頂著一頭染得很糟的頭發(fā)，穿著尖頭皮鞋，在大本鐘(Big Ben)的影子下偷偷吸煙，蹩腳地嘗試著和女孩們說話。那時的設(shè)施多種多樣——我們在中世紀(jì)的歷史瑰寶餐廳內(nèi)吃早飯，然后在幾間漏水的活動房屋內(nèi)上語言課——教學(xué)非常出色，盡管有時方法是非正統(tǒng)的。
Yet something about this venture jars. In particular, Westminster’s agreement to deliver the compulsory Chinese national curriculum, which includes political education. This is different from the way other UK schools operate in China, where they tend to stick to an international curriculum. It also seems at odds with the tradition and spirit of Westminster itself, which takes an almost perverse delight in a culture of defiant individualism, independence of mind and distrust of authority. It prides itself on having resisted the 19th-century reforms of the English “public” — ie private — system that placed so much emphasis on games and team spirit as a basis on which to raise a ruling class that would govern the world.
不過，威斯敏斯特學(xué)校的這次中國冒險，還有一些令人不太滿意的地方。特別是威斯敏斯特學(xué)校同意使用中國義務(wù)教育全國通用課程——其中包括政治教育。這不同于其他英國學(xué)校在中國的運(yùn)營方式——它們往往堅(jiān)持使用國際課程。這似乎也與威斯敏斯特學(xué)校本身的傳統(tǒng)和精神格格不入，它幾乎固執(zhí)地堅(jiān)持反抗性的個人主義、思想獨(dú)立以及不信任權(quán)威的文化。它引以為豪的是抵制了19世紀(jì)對英國“公共”(實(shí)際上是私立)學(xué)校體制——強(qiáng)調(diào)游戲和團(tuán)隊(duì)精神，視之為培養(yǎng)治理世界的統(tǒng)治階層的基礎(chǔ)——的改革。
Or at least that is what they used to tell us. The whole point about Westminster was that it was supposed to be slightly different. If it was a traditional education that offered polish but few surprises you were after, this could easily be had in London’s commuter belt or in one of the gracious, if pallid, cathedral cities.
或者至少這是他們過去告訴我們的。關(guān)于威斯敏斯特學(xué)校的關(guān)鍵在于，它本應(yīng)該有所不同。如果你追求的是精致但尋常的傳統(tǒng)教育，那么倫敦通勤者生活地帶或優(yōu)雅(但可能毫無生氣)的大教堂所在城市可以輕松找到這樣的學(xué)校。
There is a broader question closer to home: what are overseas parents actually paying for? As the numbers of foreign students have increased, schools have adapted to their new customers. At what point do they lose the qualities that attracted overseas students in the first place?
還有一個更切入核心的更為廣泛的問題：海外學(xué)生的父母花錢到底是為了什么?隨著外國學(xué)生人數(shù)不斷增加，學(xué)校已經(jīng)面向它們的新客戶做出調(diào)整。它們什么時候會失去最初吸引海外學(xué)生的品質(zhì)?
The truth is that you can never really know how things are going to turn out. For all the Establishment types bred by English private schools there have been a fair number of rebels and scoundrels. The roll-call of old Westminsters includes Kim Philby — a consummate child of the British ruling class and arch traitor to it. The one-time Kings Scholar and later KGB colonel reportedly kept up with news from school long after he had taken up residence in Moscow, having inflicted massive damage on the system he was raised to serve. One can’t help wondering what China’s ruling cadres might think about that.
事實(shí)上，你永遠(yuǎn)都無法知曉事情會如何發(fā)展。盡管英國私立學(xué)校培養(yǎng)出了眾多建制派人物，但也培養(yǎng)了相當(dāng)數(shù)量的叛徒和無賴。老威斯敏斯特學(xué)校培養(yǎng)出的畢業(yè)生包括金•菲爾比(Kim Philby)——出身于英國統(tǒng)治階層的天之驕子，卻成為英國統(tǒng)治階層的主要叛徒。據(jù)稱，曾經(jīng)獲封國王學(xué)者(King's Scholar)、后來成為克格勃(KGB)上校的菲爾比在定居莫斯科很長時間后，仍然關(guān)注母校的消息，而他已對他原本應(yīng)該服務(wù)的系統(tǒng)造成巨大傷害。人們不禁想知道中國的統(tǒng)治階層對此有何感想。
[email protected] 譯者/馬柯斯
